git-commit-vandalism/t/lib-httpd/error-no-report.sh

echo "Content-Type: application/x-git-receive-pack-result"
echo
printf '0013\001000eunpack ok\n'
printf '0015\002skipping report\n'
printf '0009\0010000'
printf '0000'
send-pack: complain about "expecting report" with --helper-status When pushing to a server which erroneously omits the final ref-status report, the client side should complain about the refs for which we didn't receive the status (because we can't just assume they were updated). This works over most transports like ssh, but for http we'll print a very misleading "Everything up-to-date". It works for ssh because send-pack internally sets the status of each ref to REF_STATUS_EXPECTING_REPORT, and then if the server doesn't tell us about a particular ref, it will stay at that value. When we print the final status table, we'll see that we're still on EXPECTING_REPORT and complain then. But for http, we go through remote-curl, which invokes send-pack with "--stateless-rpc --helper-status". The latter option causes send-pack to return a machine-readable list of ref statuses to the remote helper. But ever since its inception in de1a2fdd38 (Smart push over HTTP: client side, 2009-10-30), the send-pack code has simply omitted mention of any ref which ended up in EXPECTING_REPORT. In the remote helper, we then take the absence of any status report from send-pack to mean that the ref was not even something we tried to send, and thus it prints "Everything up-to-date". Fortunately it does detect the eventual non-zero exit from send-pack, and propagates that in its own non-zero exit code. So at least a careful script invoking "git push" would notice the failure. But sending the misleading message on stderr is certainly confusing for humans (not to mention the machine-readable "push --porcelain" output, though again, any careful script should be checking the exit code from push, too). Nobody seems to have noticed because the server in this instance has to be misbehaving: it has promised to support the ref-status capability (otherwise the client will not set EXPECTING_REPORT at all), but didn't send us any. If the connection were simply cut, then send-pack would complain about getting EOF while trying to read the status. But if the server actually sends a flush packet (i.e., saying "now you have all of the ref statuses" without actually sending any), then the client ends up in this confused situation. The fix is simple: we should return an error message from "send-pack --helper-status", just like we would for any other error per-ref error condition (in the test I included, the server simply omits all ref status responses, but a more insidious version of this would skip only some of them). Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> 2021-10-18 21:43:47 +02:00			`echo "Content-Type: application/x-git-receive-pack-result"`
			`echo`
			`printf '0013\001000eunpack ok\n'`
			`printf '0015\002skipping report\n'`
			`printf '0009\0010000'`
			`printf '0000'`